Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
You don't need to be able to use the force to use a lightsabre, you just have to be darn good with a sword with no weight but the hilt.
Star Wars #7 Character Details
- Thread starter shavedape
- Start date
YJ02
Well Known GateFan
and knowing which end is the "business end" comes in handy as well
------------------------------------------------------------
I am thinking that it is looking as if JJ is making changes akin to his Klingon redesign-though I am hoping his being a SW fan keeps him from "doing harm"
shavedape
Well Known GateFan
More JJ meddling
"chrome troopers"
lets remember the empire has suffered severe losses so why would they (the empire) taken the time to redesign uniforms? Doesn't fit the already established plot
http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/09/25/are-these-the-chrome-troopers-of-star-wars-episode-vii
Gossip is he may also be going with the way back when Ralph McQuarrie design for the troopers by giving them lightsabers as well
not as force sensitive beings-just as weapons
The pics have been taken down.
The pics have been taken down.
I still say JJ is not going to deliver on Star Wars. He will muck it up like he did Star Trek, and it will be shiny and sparkly and be Star Wars-esque, but it's soul will be missing. I bet they dont get the music score right either...anybody notice how the last Star trek movies had that boring, generic theme? Nothing Trek-like about it. Star Wars is as much the march and the grand background orchestration as it is light sabers and Jedi.
Last edited:
The pics were also revealed in the same article not to be storm troopers but rather a private security force.
So far I am cautiously neutral. The fact that so far they have shied away from CGI and also that Kasdan was called in for the script are positives.
So far I am cautiously neutral. The fact that so far they have shied away from CGI and also that Kasdan was called in for the script are positives.
Kasdan gives me hope too. Disney is well aware of the negative reception of the prequels. But this is still very much a JJ Abrams film, and that means that his signature will be all over the thing. Im still not over what they did to John Carter. They wasted hundreds of millions.
This sort of thing is raising my eyebrows:
http://www.inquisitr.com/1497929/st...illains-including-darth-vader-luke-skywalker/
Huh? Vader is dead. If he is in this next film, that means they are retconning this new character into JJ's new Star Wars film by using Darth Vader to give him cred. He did this same thing in Star Trek by having Leonard Nimoy in the film, and continually mentioning tribbles and making references to stuff in the real Star Trek.
. Many people are expecting JJ Abrams to pull this off, but we really do not see him ever doing that with anything he has created to date. Nothing he has made before Trek shows any extraordinary talent, and Trek was no different. He ruined it. Now, he is helming Star Wars. Why should we expect anything different? Unless we missed his intensive director’s boot camp course in the news, this is the exact same JJ Abrams who...in one movie...made every Federation starship obsolete.
http://www.inquisitr.com/1497929/st...illains-including-darth-vader-luke-skywalker/
Huh? Vader is dead. If he is in this next film, that means they are retconning this new character into JJ's new Star Wars film by using Darth Vader to give him cred. He did this same thing in Star Trek by having Leonard Nimoy in the film, and continually mentioning tribbles and making references to stuff in the real Star Trek.
. Many people are expecting JJ Abrams to pull this off, but we really do not see him ever doing that with anything he has created to date. Nothing he has made before Trek shows any extraordinary talent, and Trek was no different. He ruined it. Now, he is helming Star Wars. Why should we expect anything different? Unless we missed his intensive director’s boot camp course in the news, this is the exact same JJ Abrams who...in one movie...made every Federation starship obsolete.
Last edited:
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
Vader could appear as a force spirit..............
Tripler
Well Known GateFan
Wow , you guys are all up on the latest star wars unlike myself . I am just a fan of the original movie so the others are in my mind but I try to block them out completely on a daily basis . I could do the entire first movie word for word in all the characters voices if you like lol . I was that big a fan . It drove my girlfriends and now wife nuts lol . That's almost 2 hrs of weird sounds and multiple characters and voices out of a human being . Mild autism here perhaps !? I've lost interest a long time ago so it no longer occurs and amazingly , I'm still married .
I'm hoping it's just old Luke ,old Han, old Chewy and old Lea . There olderness for me will now replace the loss of my favourite character OB1(Alec Guiness) whom I miss greatly . The new OB1 is awesome also by the way , I just can't stand the rehashed newer versions .
Sounds like from what you guys are saying is the storyline may go along with the story books ? There's books ? In Johnny Carsons voice ,,, (I did not know that !) . I know of the animated series which again I do not watch .
Maybe I'll have to do a little reading and watching to catch up to you Star WarsZions
I'm hoping it's just old Luke ,old Han, old Chewy and old Lea . There olderness for me will now replace the loss of my favourite character OB1(Alec Guiness) whom I miss greatly . The new OB1 is awesome also by the way , I just can't stand the rehashed newer versions .
Sounds like from what you guys are saying is the storyline may go along with the story books ? There's books ? In Johnny Carsons voice ,,, (I did not know that !) . I know of the animated series which again I do not watch .
Maybe I'll have to do a little reading and watching to catch up to you Star WarsZions
He is already a Force Spirit.
JJ is going to try and retcon a new character who was allegedly "working with" Darth Vader, and thus should be thought of as being OG Star Wars (even though it will be a new character). I think this Star Wars movie is going to not be that great for JJ's reputation, and that Disney will fire him if the movie is not well received.--- merged: Sep 29, 2014 3:56 PM ---
That is my point...
Why do that?
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually Vader is not a Force Spirit - Anakin is. When Anakin Skywalker reassumed control Darth Vader disappeared.
As to a flashback, why not? What is wrong with making a tie back to the OT for a new character? It is part of making the new movie a continuation of the OT.
As to a flashback, why not? What is wrong with making a tie back to the OT for a new character? It is part of making the new movie a continuation of the OT.
Bluce Ree
Tech Admin / Council Member
That is a good thing?
Anakin came back as a Force Spirit in Return of the Jedi, along with Obi Wan, and that was that. Using him in a flashback to introduce a new JJ character is not necessarily good news. Can you give me a good example of ANY character worth liking in a JJ Abrams movie?
Last edited:
The same question stands. Using flashback scenes to the past to set up plot elements and characters is a story technique as old as stories themselves are. There is nothing inherently wrong with doing so. There also is nothing inherently problematic with introducing new characters, especially as this film is set 30 years after Return of the Jedi. New characters being introduced was totally inevitable.
Also, the producer or director are not the ones who create characters or determine who they are or how they act - that is done by the writer. It's why I keep saying that the biggest issue with the prequels was the writing. The awful characterizations therein were written by George Lucas who also wrote the ludicrous dialogue. Where the producer/director make their mark is in different area - pacing, visuals, sound and such. Where they interact with characters is getting the actor/actress to deliver a performance that lines up with the script.
As to Abrams and characters, actually he has created some good ones. For example Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol. He created all of the IMF team except Ethan and they all were good characters who could actually have used their own sequel. In the two Star Trek films while we may dislike Into Darkness we can't point at the characters as a prime issue because overall they are not badly done. I love Karl's Urban's McCoy in both films for example and Simon Pegg has made Scotty his own creation. The prime issue in Into Darkness was the idiotic plot which principally came from Damon Lindelof (Prometheus being incomprehensible nonsense should have been a danger sign) and Roberto Orci (his remarks about Khan label him a first class idiot forevermore).
So even IF Abrams were responsible for all the characters he has created good ones in the past. And we know he isn't because characters come from the writer not the producer.
Also, the producer or director are not the ones who create characters or determine who they are or how they act - that is done by the writer. It's why I keep saying that the biggest issue with the prequels was the writing. The awful characterizations therein were written by George Lucas who also wrote the ludicrous dialogue. Where the producer/director make their mark is in different area - pacing, visuals, sound and such. Where they interact with characters is getting the actor/actress to deliver a performance that lines up with the script.
As to Abrams and characters, actually he has created some good ones. For example Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol. He created all of the IMF team except Ethan and they all were good characters who could actually have used their own sequel. In the two Star Trek films while we may dislike Into Darkness we can't point at the characters as a prime issue because overall they are not badly done. I love Karl's Urban's McCoy in both films for example and Simon Pegg has made Scotty his own creation. The prime issue in Into Darkness was the idiotic plot which principally came from Damon Lindelof (Prometheus being incomprehensible nonsense should have been a danger sign) and Roberto Orci (his remarks about Khan label him a first class idiot forevermore).
So even IF Abrams were responsible for all the characters he has created good ones in the past. And we know he isn't because characters come from the writer not the producer.
shavedape
Well Known GateFan
I think that will be too gimmicky. Quite honestly, with a universe as big as SW there's no reason they can't create new villains. It's almost as if they're going to spoon feed us familiar shit because they think we're too dumb to handle new major characters. Truth is, the SW universe has enough familiar stuff for fans to latch onto without needing to retcon the story line just to fit in a new character.
shavedape
Well Known GateFan
You're making my point for me. We all know there will be new characters as that is inevitable, but that doesn't mean they have to use flashbacks to shoehorn in a new character. As I said before, it's kind of insulting to the intelligence of the fans.
Then again, maybe I'm making too much of it. I guess time will tell how well they pull it off. At any rate, I'm still optimistic that these new films will be better than those horrible prequels. Fingers crossed!
PRECISELY. Its a trope. It would be like showing some sort of flashback where Darth Vader somehow has OTHER children from some mysterious past fling, and they show up later (thanks JJ!). Or, Vader has a clone made of himself so that in case he was killed, he could come back (and keep his promise to Padme that he would become more powerful than death). Dumb shit like that. Lets talk about Andy Serkis, shall we? Andy does CGI motion capture. He is the BEST at it, and he gets hired to do leading CGI characters, not extras. This means he will be doing a major CGI character. You do not need motion capture for Chewie, since he can be done quite easily with a costume. But Yoda....yep, Yoda. I am betting 100% that Serkis will either be Yoda or another Yoda-being. Jar Jar Binks does not need Andy Serkis. So, who else could he be in the film? This is how I am sussing this movie out. Using past events and known trends with this director and the actors and Disney.
Im with you on this next film being better than the awful prequels though.
shavedape
Well Known GateFan
PRECISELY. Its a trope. It would be like showing some sort of flashback where Darth Vader somehow has OTHER children from some mysterious past fling, and they show up later (thanks JJ!). Or, Vader has a clone made of himself so that in case he was killed, he could come back (and keep his promise to Padme that he would become more powerful than death). Dumb shit like that. Lets talk about Andy Serkis, shall we? Andy does CGI motion capture. He is the BEST at it, and he gets hired to do leading CGI characters, not extras. This means he will be doing a major CGI character. You do not need motion capture for Chewie, since he can be done quite easily with a costume. But Yoda....yep, Yoda. I am betting 100% that Serkis will either be Yoda or another Yoda-being. Jar Jar Binks does not need Andy Serkis. So, who else could he be in the film? This is how I am sussing this movie out. Using past events and known trends with this director and the actors and Disney.
Im with you on this next film being better than the awful prequels though.
Exacty. There's no reason to flashback and tell us something else was going on during the original story. That just smacks of pandering to low-intelligence viewers. -- And pandering to the past is what bad, unimaginative writers always fall back on because they are bad and unimaginative. In short, such a gimmick is a "sure sale". It's a cheap tactic that insults the intelligence of the viewers.
Now just because Kasden is writing this one that is no guarantee it won't be a turd sandwich. Lest we forget he gave us the soapy Empire and the Teddy Bear Picnic, a.k.a Return of the Jedi. People can squawk about how great those movies were all they want but the fact is they weren't on par with the original movie.
("Luke, I'm your father."
) ("Hey, I kissed my sister!" :encouragement:
)